Hold Congress Accountable

Knowledge is power. It makes sure people understand what is happening to their country, and how they can make a difference. FreedomWorks University will give you the tools to understand economics, the workings of government, the history of the American legal system, and the most important debates facing our nation today. Enroll in FreedomWorks University today!

Search FreedomWorks

Resources

Blog

On November 26, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) released his plan to generate tax revenue from Oregon and California lands currently under control of the federal Bureau of Land Management. The plan has met with mixed reviews. Counties in Oregon that are desperate to replace lost tax revenue from timber jobs are crossing their fingers, hoping this is their long sought solution. Environmentalists are predictably frothing at the mouth. But the solution proffered only serves to expose the problem in more stark relief: the fact that any of these lands are under federal control is the real problem.

These lands have been intertwined with the federal government since 1860, when 2.4 million acres of federally owned forest lands were granted to the Oregon & California Railroad to encourage economic development. The land was taken back in 1916 after the railroad failed to meet its obligations to sell the land to settlers. In 1937, Congress passed the O&C Lands Act, which set aside the land for sustained economic development:

According to section 1181a of the O&C Act, O&C timberlands are to be managed for "permanent forest production" with timber to be "sold, cut and removed in conformity with the principal [sic] of sustained yield for the purpose of providing a permanent source of timber supply, protecting watersheds, regulating stream flow and contributing to the economic stability of local communities and industries, and providing recreational facilities."

For about 50 years, this arrangement worked well, driving a vibrant rural economy based on natural resource industries. Starting in the 1980s, however, aggressive litigation by environmental groups ground that production to a virtual standstill. The Wyden bill purports to address this problem, but indications are that the protections against litigation are insufficcient:

Douglas County Commissioner Doug Robertson, who chairs the Association of O&C Counties, on Monday said his group is finding a lot more to dislike about Oregon Sen. Ron Wyden's plan for managing some 2 million acres of federal forests in western Oregon.

Robertson said his group's initial review of the 188-page bill produced doubts about whether the bill would really reduce litigation tying up timber sales and produce much in the way of county revenue.

"I have to admit disappointment," said Robertson, adding in a telephone interview that he thought Wyden's goal of doubling timber harvests in these federal forests was "very speculative."

A previously passed bill in the House would open significantly more land to harvesting, producing around five times as much revenue for the affected counties as Wyden's bill.

Regardless of which bill is ultimately passed, however, the fundamental question remains: Why does any of this land remain under federal control? Aren't the states far better positioned to manage their own land than the federal government? As Ken Ivory of the American Lands Council points out, "upon being admitted as a state, the federal government promised all new states that it would 'extinguish title' (i.e. transfer away title) to all public lands. For all states east of Colorado (and for Hawaii), it has honored this promise." All states, upon admission to the Union, were given the same promise. In 1828, Congress heard a report from the Public Lands Committee that stated,

“If these lands are to be withheld . . . in vain may the People of these States expect the advantages of well settled neighborhoods, so essential to the education of youth . . . Those States will, for many generations, without some change, be retarded in endeavors to increase their comfort and wealth, by means of works of internal improvements, because they have not the power, incident to all sovereign States, of taxing the soil, to pay for the benefits conferred upon its owner by roads and canals. When these States stipulated not to tax the lands of the United States until they were sold, they rested upon the implied engagement of Congress to cause them to be sold, within a reasonable time. No just equivalent has been given those States for a surrender of an attribute of sovereignty so important to their welfare, and to an equal standing with the original States.”

It would seem that there is no better example of this than the O&C Lands of rural Oregon. We can continue to try to nibble around the edges, working with the federal government to give us as much of a solution as they feel like; or we can take a bold stand and find a solution that lives up to the promise of statehood and generates the maximum amount of local revenue. This is a prime example of why we have states in the first place - local control over land and revenues is far preferable to federal control.

On behalf of our activist community, I urge you to contact your senators and representative and ask them to support the Protecting Data at the Border Act, S. 823 and H.R. 1899, introduced by Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Reps. Jared Polis (R-Colo.) and Blake Farenthold (R-Texas). The bills would safeguard the Fourth Amendment rights of American citizens at the border.

There’s a show from the 1980s called ALF about an alien that ends up having to live with a family after accidentally crashing into their garage. In one episode, he runs up a major gambling tab and to pay it off raises the prices on items at the family’s garage sale without their knowledge to get the money needed to pay off his debts.

Governor Kate Brown of Oregon has just signed a bill (HB 2655) that would allow parents to opt their children out of the standardized tests that have come as part of the Common Core education standards in the state. Parents can cite any reason they choose for their opt-out decision, and the state is required to inform them ahead of time of their options.

There’s nothing more frustrating than when state legislatures try to do the right thing, only to be stopped by the intrusive federal government, sticking its nose where it has no business being. The latest example comes from Oregon, where a bill that would allow parents to opt their children out of Common Core-aligned standardized tests is set to be passed by the State Senate, only to face aggressive pushback from U.S. Department of Education.

Rarely has such a major piece of legislation as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) been passed in such an overwhelming partisan way. Without garnering a single Republican vote, ObamaCare was rammed down the throats of the American people, even though a majority opposed - and continue to oppose - the law.

At Western Liberty Network's Third Annual Leadership Training Conference and Expo, 104 attendees from Oregon and Washington spent a pleasant Saturday learning how to take responsibility for their local governments and change the fabric of their political cultures.

States that helped carry President Obama to victory in 2012, are now suffering at the hands of his signature legislation. Democrats hoping to avoid the repercussions of Obamacare are going to have a difficult time explaining away its failures in their own friendly states. Republicans are referring to it as the Blue State Obamacare Blues, with Colorado, Hawaii, Washington D.C., Oregon, Maryland, and Massachusetts all suffering varying degrees of embarrassment.

In 2011, with bipartisan support from both Democrats and Republicans, Cover Oregon was ushered in as the vanguard of the state based healthcare exchanges encouraged by the Affordable Care Act. Instead of resisting the Obamacare mandate, the Oregon legislature doubled down on Obamacare, with the encouragement of our Democrat Governor, former ER doctor John Kitzhaber. Despite innumerable warnings from grassroots activists that the project was doomed to failure, most Republicans in the legislature were persuaded to go along. Now, Oregon is saying goodbye to the terminally ill Cover Oregon, after millions in wasted taxpayer money, FBI investigations, lawsuits and political fallout that will be felt for years to come.